ARTICLE
Sick and Safe time will not improve health outcomes in the City. SAINT PAUL, MINN., (February 23, 2016) – The Saint Paul Area Chamber of Commerce remains committed to working with the City of Saint Paul on the formulation of exploring sick and safe time for individuals employed in the city who do not, at present, have access to paid time off. The Chamber is also committed to approaching this task from a data driven perspective, ensuring that facts are used as the basis for any proposed policy changes. Data below from the Minnesota Department of Health shows, quantifiably, that attempts to paint this issue as a public health issue cannot hold water. The confirmed and suspected norovirus transmission rate is incredibly low and it is unreasonable to mandate widespread regulatory action in the hopes of eliminating a very small number of illnesses each year. This is particularly true since ensuring that all employees have access to paid sick leave does not mean they will always use it. The Chamber recently completed an analysis of the Minnesota Department of Health’s data on “Foodborne, Waterborne, and Animal Contact Outbreaks and Gastrointestinal Outbreaks due to other transmission routes.” We examined data for the years 2006 through 2012. More current data is not yet available from MDH. Gastrointestinal outbreaks are defined by the Department “as two or more cases of gastrointestinal illness related by time and place in which an epidemiologic evaluation suggests either person-to-person transmission occurred.” There are also gastrointestinal outbreaks for which the route of transmission could not be determined. Norovirus, the most common gastrointestinal outbreak, constitutes almost half of all confirmed outcomes. This trend has remained true, according to MDH, since the 1980’s. MDH states, “Many outbreaks of norovirus are due to ill food workers handling ready-to-eat food items such as salads and sandwiches in restaurant or catering settings. In other foodborne norovirus outbreaks, ill or convalescent individuals contaminate shared food (e.g., self-serve food items in a wedding reception buffet, or school cafeteria). Prevention of further disease transmission during norovirus outbreaks is accomplished by emphasizing good hand washing procedures, minimizing bare-hand contact with ready-to-eat foods items, minimizing environmental contamination, and excluding ill employees from work until 72 hours after recovery.” As the Saint Paul City Council chose to emphasize the transmission of norovirus in their resolution “WHEREAS, at least 208 outbreaks of foodborne illness in Minnesota between 2004 and 2013 were linked to employees working while sick;” the Chamber believes it is important to more closely examine the data supplied by the Minnesota Department of Health. Of note, 208 outbreaks of foodborne illness in 10 years is approximately 20 such incidents, statewide, per year. But how many incidents actually affect the city of Saint Paul, where the proposed action is contemplated? A statewide number may seem interesting, but if it has little impact in the city, any proposed action will likely have little to no impact on the health of Saint Paul consumers of food hospitality services. Importantly, the Minnesota Department of Health offers exactly this analysis. The table below shows the number of complaints per year in the City of Saint Paul and the number of confirmed and suspected cases of norovirus transmission. For obvious reasons transmission of a foodborne illness as a result of improper food handling (for example, cold food warming to an unsafe temperature) are not included. Only norovirus outbreaks, which involve a sick individual handling the food, were counted. We also included suspected norovirus transmission as in some cases the root cause of transmission cannot be confirmed. As can be seen, the actual number of norovirus transmissions, per year, is incredibly low. The vast majority of reported incidents are simply not confirmed. The Chamber acknowledges that it is entirely possible that unreported cases exist, and indeed, are highly probable. But facts must be used to inform the debate, and the facts should speak for themselves. In this case the facts demonstrate that illnesses spread to consumers from ill food workers are, rhetoric to the contrary, extremely rare and are hardly a cause of widespread concern or action.